Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-07-2002
Reported in : 2002(5)KarLJ275
..... proceedings held at secunderabad. a witness staying in bangalore is required for examination. the summons were issued to the witness through magistrate under the provisions of section 135(3) of the army act. therefore, the assistant judge, advocate general, headquarters, southern command, made a request to chief metropolitan magistrate for issuance of warrant of arrest to the witness ..... the court declined to issue warrant of arrest by itself and thus rejected the request. being aggrieved, the present revision petition is filed. 4. the provisions of section 135 of the army act reads thus: '(1) the convening officer, the presiding officer of a court-martial, the judge, advocate or the commanding officer of the accused person may, by ..... to issue the warrant or arrest as prayed for. further, it is directed that the execution of warrant of arrest to be entrusted to the army authorities in view of the provisions contained in section 72 of the cr. p.c. accordingly, the petition is disposed off.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-25-2002
Reported in : 2003(68)DRJ686
..... submitted that the petitioner had admitted his guilt. it was pointed out that the entire trial was conducted in a fair manner and in terms of the army act, 1950 and the rules framed there under, namely, army rules, 1954. as regards number of the butt, it was contended that at the time of seizure of the weapon, pw-18, i.e., si ..... out by respondents 2 and 3. it had been pleaded that the inquiry under rule 22 as against respondent no. 1 related to an offence which came under section 63 of the army act, namely, conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline; while the charge he was called upon to face in the general court martial was one of theft ..... punishable under section 52(a) of the army act. we have seen the evidence recorded in the inquiry under rule 22. it is a fact that the allegations at the stage of inquiry under rule 22 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-15-2002
Reported in : 103(2003)DLT269; 2003(3)SLJ303(Delhi)
..... of the citizen, but he is unaware of them. certain procedures have been laid down in various documents about which very few people seem to be aware.army act, 1950 13. retirement, release or discharge of army personnel is provided for in section 22 of the army act, 1950 (for short the act).14. this provision reads as under:'22. retirement, release or discharge. - any person subject to this ..... act may be retired, released or discharged from the service by such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed.'15. section 191 of the act empowers the central government to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-11-2002
Reported in : 100(2002)DLT705; 2003(1)SLJ154(Delhi)
..... the contentions of the petitioner in this writ petition are as under :-(i) the show-cause notice issued by the brigadier is contrary to the provisions of the army act, 1950 and the army rules, 1954;(ii) as the orders awarding punishment had been passed by authorities lacking inherent jurisdiction, the same being nullities; no action pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof ..... your show cause letter no. 7774829/ ssa/a dated 13th sep. 1999.i beg to submit that i have served in the army for a period of 14 years. though the punishments awarded to me are under army act section 48 which is for intoxication. sir, i have left my drinks all together and assure you that i shall not be consuming ..... (red ink entries) have been awarded to you during your 13 years and 10 months of service:-s.no.punishment awardeddate of punishmentoffence committed(a)severe reprimand16 jan 95under sec 48 of a a(b)deprived of appt of l/nk.03 feb 95- do -(c)severe reprimand10 feb 99-do-(d)severe reprimand08 mar 99- do -(e) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-17-2002
Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)917; 96(2002)DLT432; 2003(1)SLJ1(Delhi); 2002(5)SLR399
..... is no dispute about the fact that the order dated 24.11.1988 has been passed in exercise of power under section 18. the order is as under: the president, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 18 of the army act, 1950 and all other enabling provisions in this behalf, is pleased to order that the services of ic-3066l maj. rajinder ..... the action under regulation 16(a) on the sole ground of use of the word 'dismissed' even when the order of 21.2.1971 is passed under section 18 of the act. though the pleasure doctrine is quite all embracing still we must not forget that our constitution adhors arbitrariness, and proclaims clearly that it is a government of laws ..... total forfeiture of pension should be made. but where, as in the present case dismissal is in exercise of presidential pleasure under article 310 of constitution read with section 18 of the act, it is apparent that no reasons will be told or known to the officer. in such a case if regulation 16(a) could be invoked it would .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-29-2002
Reported in : [2004]138STC186(Mad)
..... a question of law was involved in the decision so arrived at by the statutory authorities, carried the matter on revision to this court under section 38 of the tngst act. the revision was transferred to the taxation special tribunal after its constitution and the special tribunal after hearing the parties in an elaborate manner had come ..... subjected to the process of curing, it still remained to be the agricultural produce and as such it is exempted from tax under explanation (1) to section 2(r) of tngst act. the last fact finding authority, the appellate tribunal had also on facts found that the process of curing 'cardamom' in a curing house in a ..... other process for being made fit for consumption, save mere cleaning, grading, sorting or drying.'as per the explanation, in order to get exemption under section 2(r) of the tngst act for agricultural produce, such produce has not been subjected to any physical, chemical or other process for being made it fit for consumption except mere cleaning, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-04-2002
Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)433; 96(2002)DLT217; 2002(62)DRJ16
..... to 9 in criminal courts and court martial (adjustment of jurisdiction) rules, 1952 and the sections 80 and 81 of the bsf act are equivalent to sections 125 and 126 of the army act, 1950. she argued that under section 46 of the bsf act, offences under sections 279/337 ipc with which accused was charged are triable both by criminal courts as well ..... for determination as to which court should try the accused. thus it was argued that the impugned order rejecting the application of the petitioner under section 80 of the bsf act and requiring the commanding officer to produce the accused so that he can be delivered to the commandant is illegal. reliance was placed on the ..... 1995. on that date, the commanding officer of the 41 bn. through shri r.v. sinha, advocate moved an application (dated 10th march, 1995) under section 80 of the bsf act, inter alia, stating therein that accused subhas chander had been working with the bsf and posted under hq 41 bn. bsf, dhubulia, nadia, west bengal and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-27-2002
Reported in : 2003(66)DRJ172
..... air2000sc3425 . 31. the role of a law officer in terms of the afore-mentioned rule, need not be highlighted. the law officer in proceedings under the act, acts like a judge-advocate under the army act. in his briefing, the categorically stated that the statement of hc jeevan bhujal had been corroborated in material particulars of pw3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ..... petitioner could have objected to the illegality in the matter of constitution of court at that time only does not seem to be correct in view of section 84 of the bsf act which reads thus:'84. challenge .-- (1) at all trials by a general security force court or by a petty security force court, as soon ..... of every officer successfully challenged has been filled by another officer to whom no objection is made or allowed, the court shall proceed with the trial.' 17. section 84 of the act, thereupon, operates in a limited filed. in terms of the said provision, the petitioner could not have objected to the legality or otherwise of the constitution .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-25-2002
Reported in : (2002)2CALLT385(HC)
..... mr. bag demonstrated from the record produced before me that adequate opportunity was given to the writ petitioner to defend himself. he further submitted that under army act and rules framed thereunder summery court martial procedure had been adopted in the instant case and the writ petitioner was accordingly punished by the appropriate authority.14. ..... on perusal of records i do not find any basis of such contention of mr. dutta. under rule 106 to 133 and the army rules, 1954 framed under the army act the respondent authority was empowered to punish a member of the force by summery court martial procedure. i do not find any violation thereof ..... before it and to follow the procedural safeguards. if one looks at the provisions of law relating to court martialin the army act, the army rules. defence service regulations and other administrative instructions of the army, it is manifestly clear that the procedure prescribed is perhaps equally fair if not more than a criminal trial provides to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-08-2002
Reported in : 2010[17]STR451
..... on the very next date i.e. 11th april, 2002 the petitioner submitted a statutory complaint of the central government under section 27 of the army act read with para 346 of the regulations for the army. as no response was received he filed writ petition no. 2459/2002 on 17th april, 2002 as he apprehended that the ..... plea regarding pre-trial infirmities, if any. thereforee, the petitioner was not remedilessand he could still raise the contention regarding pre-trial infirmities, namely, infraction of army rule 22 to 24 during general court martial proceedings.14. to allay the fears of the petitioner that no such opportunity would be given to him now, ..... happened for quite some time. thereafter vide order dated 13th february, 2002 disciplinary action against the petitioner was initiated by conducting hearing of the charge proceedings under army rule 22 by goc 9 inf. div. (the commanding officer of the petitioner) under whom the petitioner was attached and he ordered the evidence to be reduced .....
Tag this Judgment!